Comprehension
Both lawmen and laymen often ask, ‘What is the law applicable to a given set of facts?’ The answers to this question differ depending upon the specific jurisdiction to which the given set of facts is linked. Contrary to this, scholars and students of jurisprudence are likely to ask the general question, viz ‘What is Law?’. This question on the philosophy and nature of law supposes that law is a distinctive social-political phenomenon with universal characteristics that can be perceived through philosophical analysis. In such a study, the assumption is that law possesses some universal characteristics.
An analysis of the philosophy of law can be done for different reasons. Apart from a purely intellectual interest in understanding this complex phenomenon known as law, scholars also study the same as a normative social practice that purports to guide human behaviour, giving rise to reasons for action. The primary challenge of the branch of scholarship known as jurisprudence is based on this ‘normative, reason-giving aspect of law’. At the same time, we must understand that law is not the only normative realm in any given society. It is one of the many normative standards such as morality, religion, customs and usages, etiquette, self-regulatory standards within a family or corporation etc. So, it is also essential that we study law on the differences and similarities of the same with these normative standards.
While discerning these connections and contradictions, legal theories often study the content of the norm apart from giving importance to the source. Generally, theoretical studies on the content such as natural lawyers emphasize values such as fairness, justice, liberty etc., as qualifications for the norms to be called laws. They have argued that laws must be in tune with certain principles of inner morality, such as that laws be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable are indispensable to law-making. Whereas theories that give prominence to the sources of the norm, such as enactment/command by political institution/authority, do not always emphasize on the content.
Such philosophical analysis of law comprises both explanatory and justificatory aspects. While the explanatory aspect consists of explaining how laws can give rise to reasons and what kinds of reasons are involved. One example of this would be Dworkin’s classification of law as concepts, principles and rules. The aspect of justification concerns whether people ought to comply with the law’s demands. In other words, it is the attempt to explain the moral legitimacy of law and the subjects’ reasons for complying with it.
An analysis of the philosophy of law can be done for different reasons. Apart from a purely intellectual interest in understanding this complex phenomenon known as law, scholars also study the same as a normative social practice that purports to guide human behaviour, giving rise to reasons for action. The primary challenge of the branch of scholarship known as jurisprudence is based on this ‘normative, reason-giving aspect of law’. At the same time, we must understand that law is not the only normative realm in any given society. It is one of the many normative standards such as morality, religion, customs and usages, etiquette, self-regulatory standards within a family or corporation etc. So, it is also essential that we study law on the differences and similarities of the same with these normative standards.
While discerning these connections and contradictions, legal theories often study the content of the norm apart from giving importance to the source. Generally, theoretical studies on the content such as natural lawyers emphasize values such as fairness, justice, liberty etc., as qualifications for the norms to be called laws. They have argued that laws must be in tune with certain principles of inner morality, such as that laws be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable are indispensable to law-making. Whereas theories that give prominence to the sources of the norm, such as enactment/command by political institution/authority, do not always emphasize on the content.
Such philosophical analysis of law comprises both explanatory and justificatory aspects. While the explanatory aspect consists of explaining how laws can give rise to reasons and what kinds of reasons are involved. One example of this would be Dworkin’s classification of law as concepts, principles and rules. The aspect of justification concerns whether people ought to comply with the law’s demands. In other words, it is the attempt to explain the moral legitimacy of law and the subjects’ reasons for complying with it.
Question: 1
Validity of law resides in the political sovereignty of the maker of that law refers to:
Validity of law resides in the political sovereignty of the maker of that law refers to:
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- Legal Positivism
- Natural Law
- Historical School
- Sociological School
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
To determine which legal theory suggests that the validity of law resides in the political sovereignty of the maker of that law, we must explore the philosophies underlying legal theories:
- Legal Positivism: This legal theory holds that laws are rules created by human authorities and their legitimacy is derived from the institutions that create them. According to legal positivism, the validity of a law is determined by its source, not its content. Laws are valid if they are enacted by an authority with political sovereignty, reflecting an emphasis on the formal enactment by a recognized authority.
- Natural Law: This theory suggests that laws are valid if they align with moral principles or universal ethical standards. It emphasizes the content of laws being inherently just or fair, rather than focusing solely on the origin.
- Historical School: This school of thought asserts that law is an expression of the spirit of a people and evolves with society over time. It focuses on cultural traditions and historical context.
- Sociological School: This perspective sees law as a social institution which must be understood in terms of its social function and impact. It emphasizes how laws arise from social needs and values.
Given these considerations, the concept that "validity of law resides in the political sovereignty of the maker of that law" is most closely associated with Legal Positivism. Legal positivism distinctly views the validity of a law as rooted in its authoritative creation rather than its moral, historical, or social context.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
A norm cannot become legally valid unless its content is fair and just in accordance to:
A norm cannot become legally valid unless its content is fair and just in accordance to:
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- Legal Positivism
- Natural Law
- Historical School
- Sociological School
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
To understand why the correct answer is "Natural Law," we need to delve into various legal theories.
Natural Law: This theory emphasizes that for a law to be valid, it must be inherently fair and just, aligning with moral and ethical principles. It suggests that legal norms derive their legitimacy not merely from enactments by an authority but from their content adhering to universal moral standards. Natural lawyers argue that laws must align with inner morality principles such as fairness, justice, coherence, and clarity. Hence, a norm is valid under natural law only if it meets these moral qualifications.
Other Theories: Legal Positivism focuses on the origin of the law, such as being enacted by legitimate authorities, without necessarily considering the fairness of its content. The Historical School emphasizes the evolution of law based on cultural and historical contexts, while the Sociological School views law as a social institution shaped by societal factors.
Therefore, under Natural Law, norms must be fair and just in their content to achieve legal validity.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
“The falsehood of legal positivism resides in envisaging that the law consists of only rules. However, this is a serious mistake since legal principles partly determine the law in addition to rules. The distinction between rules and principles is a logical one. Rules apply in an ‘all or nothing fashion.’ If the rule applies to the circumstances, it determines a particular legal outcome. If it does not apply, it is simply irrelevant to the outcome…..” according to:
“The falsehood of legal positivism resides in envisaging that the law consists of only rules. However, this is a serious mistake since legal principles partly determine the law in addition to rules. The distinction between rules and principles is a logical one. Rules apply in an ‘all or nothing fashion.’ If the rule applies to the circumstances, it determines a particular legal outcome. If it does not apply, it is simply irrelevant to the outcome…..” according to:
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- ronald dworkin, taking rights Seriously,1977
- John Finnis, Natural Law and Natural rights, 1980.
- H.L.A.Hart, the Concept of Law, 1961.
- raz, Joseph, Legal Principles and the Limits of Law, 1972.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The provided question revolves around a quote about the nature of legal principles and rules, attributed to a specific author. To determine the correct answer, it is essential to consider the contributors to legal philosophy who have discussed such distinctions.
Among the given options, "ronald dworkin, taking rights Seriously,1977" aligns with the quoted content. Dworkin, a renowned legal philosopher, criticized legal positivism and emphasized the significance of principles alongside rules in law. His work, "Taking Rights Seriously," discusses the notion that law is not merely a system of rules but also includes principles that guide judicial decisions. This contrasts with legal positivists like H.L.A. Hart who focused on the systematic nature of law based on rules.
Therefore, the most accurate attribution of the provided quote is to Ronald Dworkin in his book "Taking Rights Seriously, 1977."
| Option | Author | Work | Publication Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ronald Dworkin | Taking Rights Seriously | 1977 |
| 2 | John Finnis | Natural Law and Natural Rights | 1980 |
| 3 | H.L.A. Hart | The Concept of Law | 1961 |
| 4 | Joseph Raz | Legal Principles and the Limits of Law | 1972 |
In summary, the statement in question is most likely from Ronald Dworkin's exploration of law, where he argues for a broader understanding that encompasses both rules and principles.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
Principles requiring that laws be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable are indispensable to law-making correspond to:
Principles requiring that laws be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable are indispensable to law-making correspond to:
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- inner morality
- method of logic
- Legitimacy and transparency in law making
- democratic law making
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The principles requiring laws to be general, public, prospective, coherent, clear, stable, and practicable fall under the concept of "inner morality". This concept is discussed in the philosophy of law and was extensively explored by legal theorists like Lon L. Fuller. According to Fuller's analysis, a system of rules cannot be considered a legal system unless it exhibits these qualities. The characteristics of inner morality are integral to ensuring that laws effectively guide and regulate human behavior. This makes them indispensable to the process of law-making, as they establish the necessary moral framework for the functioning of laws.
The concept of inner morality is distinct from other approaches to law which might focus on the source of legal norms, such as commands from an authority, rather than on the content or moral principles the law should embody. Legal scholars emphasize that for laws to truly serve their purpose, they must adhere to these moral principles, ensuring fairness, coherence, and reasonableness.
In this context, inner morality supports the idea that laws should:
- Be general: Applicable to everyone without discrimination or favoritism.
- Be public: Known or accessible to all, ensuring transparency.
- Be prospective: Focus on regulating future actions rather than past ones.
- Be coherent: Free of contradictions and logically structured.
- Be clear: Easily understandable for those subject to the laws.
- Be stable: Not subject to frequent, arbitrary changes.
- Be practicable: Possible to comply with and enforce effectively.
These principles are essential in distinguishing a legal framework from arbitrary commands and ensure that the law remains a normative guide for society.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
‘i mean simply that history, in illuminating the past, illuminates the present, and in illuminating the present, illuminates the future’ opined by:
‘i mean simply that history, in illuminating the past, illuminates the present, and in illuminating the present, illuminates the future’ opined by:
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- roscoe Pound
- Benjamin Cardozo
- Duguit
- Auguste Comte
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Benjamin Cardozo is credited with the statement, ‘I mean simply that history, in illuminating the past, illuminates the present, and in illuminating the present, illuminates the future.’ This statement reflects the interconnectedness of historical, present, and future legal contexts, a concept studied within jurisprudence.
In legal studies, understanding the philosophy and nature of law involves analyzing it as a distinctive social-political phenomenon with universal characteristics. Jurisprudence, the branch dealing with the normative aspects of law, questions the ‘What is Law?’ concept. Law shares space with other normative standards such as morality, religion, and custom. Legal theories examine both sources and content of norms, prioritizing different aspects.
While natural law theories prioritize values like fairness and justice as qualifications for laws, other theories focus more on sources like political authorities. Philosophical analysis of law includes both explanatory and justificatory aspects, such as Dworkin’s classifications and the moral legitimacy of legal demands.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 6
the life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience’ is stated by:
the life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience’ is stated by:
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- Holmes
- Dworkin
- Cardozo
- Amartya Sen
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The statement, "the life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience," is attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., an influential American jurist and Supreme Court Justice. Holmes emphasized the role of human experience in shaping the law, as opposed to deriving law purely from logical deductions or abstract principles.
In legal studies, this perspective highlights the idea that law evolves through practical applications and societal changes rather than solely through theoretical constructs. While logical reasoning is undoubtedly essential in legal processes, Holmes points out that the development and application of laws are deeply rooted in the context of human experience and societal needs.
This viewpoint is reflective of Holmes' broader philosophy on jurisprudence, where he often emphasized pragmatism and realism in understanding and applying law.
Correct Answer: Holmes
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Jurisprudence
- According to Henry Maine, “The movement of progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from ___________”.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- The solidary obligation imposes ___________ liability in law.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- Which prominent jurist has developed the Will Theory of Rights?
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- As per the definition given by John Austin, ownership is a right unrestricted in point of ______.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- A precedent given per incuriam is _______________.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
View More Questions
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Nil Ratan Kundu and another v. Abhijit Kundu’ 2008(3) Apex Court Judgements 232 (SC), while granting the custody to the maternal grandparents observed: In our judgement, the law relating to custody of a child is fairly well settled and it is this. In deciding a difficult and complex question as to custody of minor, a Court of law should keep in mind relevant statutes and the rights flowing therefrom. But such cases cannot be decided solely by interpreting legal provisions. It is a humane problem in live in relationship and is required to be solved with human touch. A Court while dealing with custody cases, is neither bound by statutes nor by strict rules of evidence or procedure nor by precedents. In selecting proper guardian of a minor, the paramount consideration should be the welfare and well-being of the child. In selecting a guardian, the Court is exercising parens patriae jurisdiction and is expected, may bound, to give due weight to a child’s ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings. But over and above physical comforts, moral and ethical values cannot be ignored. They are equally, or we may say, even more important, essential and indispensable consideration. If the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference or judgement, the Court must consider such preference as well, though the final decision should rest with the Court as to what is conducive to the welfare of the minor.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Gaurav Nagpal v. Semedha Nagpal’-(2009)1 SCC 42, while giving paramount importance to the welfare of the child, which should include moral and ethical values, besides ethical well-being, observed as under:
When the court is confronted with conflicting demands made by the parents, each time it has to justify the demands. The Court has not only to look at the issue on legalistic basis, in such matters human angles are relevant for deciding those issues. The Court then does not give emphasis on what the parties say, it has to exercise a jurisdiction which is aimed at the welfare of the minor. As observed recently in Mausami Moitra Ganguli case, the Court has to give due weightage to the child’s ordinary contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings, but over and above physical comforts, the moral and ethical values have also to be noted. They are equal if not more important than the others.
(Extracts from Jaswinder Singh and Another vs Surjit Singh, AIR 2010 (NOC) 425 (P. & H.))- CLAT PG - 2025
- Family Laws
- The Companies Act, 2013 does not deal with insolvency and bankruptcy when the companies are unable to pay their debts or the aspects relating to the revival and rehabilitation of the companies and their winding up if revival and rehabilitation is not possible. In principle, it cannot be doubted that the cases of revival or winding up of the company on the ground of insolvency and inability to pay debts are different from cases where companies are wound up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013. The two situations are not identical. Under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013, even a running and financially sound company can also be wound up for the reasons in clauses (a) to (e). The reasons and grounds for winding up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013 are vastly different from the reasons and grounds for the revival and rehabilitation scheme as envisaged under the IBC. The two enactments deal with two distinct situations and in our opinion, they cannot be equated when we examine whether there is discrimination or violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For the revival and rehabilitation of the companies, certain sacrifices are required from all quarters, including the workmen. In case of insolvent companies, for the sake of survival and regeneration, everyone, including the secured creditors and the Central and State Government, are required to make sacrifices. The workmen also have a stake and benefit from the revival of the company, and therefore unless it is found that the sacrifices envisaged for the workmen, which certainly form a separate class, are onerous and burdensome so as to be manifestly unjust and arbitrary, we will not set aside the legislation,solely on the ground that some or marginal sacrifice is to be made by the workers. We would also reject the argument that to find out whether there was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or whether the right to life under Article 21 Constitution of India was infringed, we must word by word examine the waterfall mechanism envisaged under the Companies Act, 2013, where the company is wound up in terms of grounds (a) to (e) of Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013; and the rights of the workmen when the insolvent company is sought to be revived, rehabilitated or wound up under the Code. The grounds and situations in the context of the objective and purpose of the two enactments are entirely different.
(Extracted, with edits and revision, from the judgement in Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand Sharma v. Union of India and Ors, 2023 SCC Online SC 547)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Company Law
- Ahmadi, J. (as he then was) speaking for himself and Punchhi, J., endorsed the recommendations in the following words-The time is ripe for taking stock of the working of the various Tribunals set up in the country after the insertion of Articles 323-A and 323-B in the Constitution. After the incorporation of these two articles, Acts have been enacted where-under tribunals have been constituted for dispensation of justice. Sufficient time has passed, and experience gained in these last few years for taking stock of the situation with a view to finding out if they have served the purpose and objectives for which they were constituted. Complaints have been heard in regard to the functioning of other tribunals as well and it is time that a body like the Law Commission of India has a comprehensive look-in with a view to suggesting measures for their improved functioning. That body can also suggest changes in the different statutes and evolve a model on the basis whereof tribunals may be constituted or reconstituted with a view to ensuring greater independence. An intensive and extensive study needs to be undertaken by the Law Commission in regard to the Constitution of tribunals under various statutes with a view to ensuring their independence so that the public confidence in such tribunals may increase and the quality of their performance may improve.
Before parting with the case, it is necessary to express our anguish over the ineffectiveness of the alternative mechanism devised for judicial review. The judicial review and remedy are the fundamental rights of the citizens. The dispensation of justice by the tribunal is much to be desired.
(Extracted with Edits from R.K. Jain v. Union of India, 1993 (4) SCC 119)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
- The elements of tort of negligence consist in – (a) duty of care; (b) duty is owed to the plaintiff; (c) the duty has been carelessly breached. Negligence does not entail liability unless the exacts a duty in the given circumstances to observe care. Duty is an obligation recognised by law to avoid conduct fraught with unreasonable risk of damage to others. The question whether duty exists in a particular situation involves determination of law. Hence, three ingredients are necessary for the existence of a duty of care: (i) foreseeability of the damage, (ii) proximity of relationship between the parties; and (iii) whether it is “just, fair and reasonable” that the law should impose a duty of care. In Caparo Industries Plc. v. Dickman, 1990 2AC 605, the court held that breach of duty is concerned with the standard of care that ought to have been adopted in the circumstances and whether the defendant’s conduct fell below that standard i.e., whether he was careless.
The court while quoting Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum, 1997 stated that as a tort, negligence consists of legal duty to take care and breach of that duty. Duty determines whether the type of loss suffered by the plaintiff in the particular way in which to occurred can ever be actionable. The division of negligence into duty, breach and consequent damage is convenient for the purpose of exposition but it can be confusing because the issues will often overlap. The process of determining a breach of duty involves three steps: First, it is necessary to ascertain the qualities of the reasonable person, given the qualities attributed to him, would have taken in the circumstances. The factors that are permissible to take into account in this regard are prescribed by law, but the amount of care that the reasonable person would have taken is a question of fact. Thirdly, it must be determined whether the defendant took less care than the reasonable person would have taken.
(Extracts from Managing Director, Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited v. Deepti Singh and Ors., 2019 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Law of Torts
- Article 14 of the Constitution stipulates that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India. Article 15(1) states that the State should not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. Article 15(4) stipulates that nothing in Article 15 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Article 16 deals with equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Clause (1) of Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Clause (2) stipulates that no citizen shall be discriminated in or be ineligible for any employment or office under the State on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them. Clause (4) of the provision states that nothing in Article 16 shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens, which in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. The purpose of the equal opportunity principle in Article 16(1) and the reservation provision in Article 16(4) has emerged as a focal point of the jurisprudence on reservations in this Court. A discussion of the journey of the competing models of equality that the Court has espoused and their evolution over the course of the years is necessary to understand the constitutional vision on equality.
The impugned constitutional amendments by which Article 16 (4-A) and 16 (4-B) have been inserted, flow from Article 16 (4). They do not alter the structure of Article 16 (4). They retain the controlling factors or the compelling reasons which enables the State to provide for reservation keeping in mind the overall efficiency of the state administration under article 335. Sub-categorization within a class is a constitutional requirement to secure substantive equality in the event that there is a distinction between two sections of a class; Sub-classification must not lead to the exclusion of one of the categories in the class. A model that provides sufficient opportunities to all categories of the class must be adopted; and Sub-classification among a class must be on a reasonable basis.
Justice Bela Trivedi opined, in dissent, that presidential list of scheduled castes notified under Article 341 cannot be altered by the States. Any change to this list can only be made by a law enacted by Parliament. Sub-classification, according to her would amount to tampering with the Presidential List and undermine the object Article 341, which aims to eliminate political influence in the SC-ST List. Further, she emphasised the importance of adhering to the rule of plain and literal interpretation. She mentions that any preferential treatment for a sub-class within the presidential list would deprive other classes within the same category of their benefits. In the absence of executive or legislative power, state lack the competence to sub-classify castes and the benefit reserved for all SCs. Allowing states to do so would constitute a colourable exercise of power, which is impermissible under law. Justice Trivedi concluded by affirming that affirmative action by States must remain within constitutional boundaries and held that the law laid down in E.V. Chinnaiah case was correct and should be upheld.
(Extract from The State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. 2024 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
View More Questions